Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Moderator: James Robinson
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I'll be out at 3.25 so I'll have to watch when I get home on 4od, so good luck with winning. It's nice to see you again since the only time we met was at COLIN 2005 and I can tell you've been working out since then.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
- Craig Beevers
- Series 57 Champion
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 am
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Can't be arsed checking if AIRCREW is in, should be anyways...
and WARNER = WARREN
and WARNER = WARREN
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I did R5 the same way as Charlito at first, then spotted the challenger's way and felt a right berk...
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
AIRCREW is allowed.Craig Beevers wrote:Can't be arsed checking if AIRCREW is in, should be anyways...
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:15 pm
- Location: Harlow
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Another way for first numbers: (100+6)x7/2=371
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Number Game 1:
(100 / 2) + (10 - (6 + 1)) = 53 x 7 = 371.
(100 / 2) + (10 - (6 + 1)) = 53 x 7 = 371.
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Charlie said on facebook that this'd be a corker... I think I can see why!
- Ben Hunter
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1770
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
- Location: S Yorks
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Darren will have that moment 'repressed' I'm sure
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
NEGATORS as an equaller.
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
(10+1)*5*5+8-1- that's also 282.
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
2nd numbers game again:
(5 x 5) + 10 = 35; (35 x 8) + 1 + 1 = 282.
(5 x 5) + 10 = 35; (35 x 8) + 1 + 1 = 282.
- Craig Beevers
- Series 57 Champion
- Posts: 653
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 am
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
God another 9, why didn't I ever get letters like this...
Should be another big 100+ score anyways.
Should be another big 100+ score anyways.
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
3rd Numbers alt: (((4 x 7) + 3) x 10) + 1
EDIT: Well done Charlie for a cracking 2nd win and also getting the highest score of the series
EDIT: Well done Charlie for a cracking 2nd win and also getting the highest score of the series
- Mark Kudlowski
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
3rd numbers game:
(5 x 7) x (10 - 1) - 4 = 311.
(5 x 7) x (10 - 1) - 4 = 311.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:15 pm
- Location: Harlow
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Another alternative for third numbers: (10+1)x7x4+3
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Great stuff, I got SPREADERS but missed INCUBATES - disappointed Charlie missed the 2nd numbers though. What's the biggest winning margin anyway? That game when DOD left someone with about 15?
I was particularly amused by the rounds when the challenger was clearly risking his 7 (or whatever) and then Charlie would confidently declare an 8 (or equivalent beater) anyway
I was particularly amused by the rounds when the challenger was clearly risking his 7 (or whatever) and then Charlie would confidently declare an 8 (or equivalent beater) anyway
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Nice one Charlie. I only managed to beat you on the conundrum (but under studio pressure etc I may not have) so you owned me there!
240 in 2 games is pretty f**king magical!
240 in 2 games is pretty f**king magical!
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Fantastic game, Charlie.
I matched you up to round 6, then you soared away. It was wonderful to watch.
At least I convincingly beat your challenger today.
I got a DC equaller for round 3 that I didn't hear mentioned: TRAUMA
I got BATTENED for round 13 (correctly spelt )
Highest score of the series so far.
I can't see you not being in the finals, unless you're unlucky enough to be challenged by someone equally as brilliant.
P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
I matched you up to round 6, then you soared away. It was wonderful to watch.
At least I convincingly beat your challenger today.
I got a DC equaller for round 3 that I didn't hear mentioned: TRAUMA
I got BATTENED for round 13 (correctly spelt )
Highest score of the series so far.
I can't see you not being in the finals, unless you're unlucky enough to be challenged by someone equally as brilliant.
P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
Last edited by Julie T on Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli
- Ben Wilson
- Legend
- Posts: 4547
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:05 pm
- Location: North Hykeham
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Julian beat his final heat opponent by 109- still the only 100+ margin in history. Still six games left for Charlie though...Michael Wallace wrote:Great stuff, I got SPREADERS but missed INCUBATES - disappointed Charlie missed the 2nd numbers though. What's the biggest winning margin anyway? That game when DOD left someone with about 15?
I was particularly amused by the rounds when the challenger was clearly risking his 7 (or whatever) and then Charlie would confidently declare an 8 (or equivalent beater) anyway
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
http://www.apterous.org/cdb/records.php ... est_marginMichael Wallace wrote:What's the biggest winning margin anyway? That game when DOD left someone with about 15?
- Richard Priest
- Devotee
- Posts: 678
- Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
- Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I spotted INCUBATES and SPREADERS but missed DESPOILS, AIRLINER and DETONATE and was nowhere near the conundrum so I have to concede defeat to Charlie today, well done great score.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:38 am
- Location: Enfield, Middlesex
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Alright, I'll let you off now, despite the incubates miss.Dan Vanniasingham wrote:Personally - I'm disappointed. I expected at least 125 for a debut score and a 70+ point winning margin. Rubbish.
Sincerely,
Mr I M Takinda Pees
- Martin Bishop
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:29 pm
- Location: Tadworth, Surrey
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
No, but I got BARSTOOL (not sure if it's one word) for the first one. That's even worse, because the clue almost worked.Julie T wrote:Fantastic game, Charlie.
P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
Well done, Charlie. Beat me on the conundrum this time.
-
- Series 58 Champion
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: Cardiff
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I forgot Charlie was appearing so it was a real surprise (a nice one, honest) to see you on Wednesday. Great stuff so far, it's great having a forumite on again to cheer on. 120 average so far , I am worried about my place in the octochamp listings but at this rate even Mr. Fell might be a little bit worried!
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Commiserations, Martin. I thought TOOLBARS was a brilliant TTT and clue, though.Martin Bishop wrote:No, but I got BARSTOOL (not sure if it's one word) for the first one. That's even worse, because the clue almost worked.Julie T wrote:Fantastic game, Charlie.
P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
Well done, Charlie. Beat me on the conundrum this time.
Lots of references to get: computer - toolbars, screwdriver - tools and vodka and orange, bars where you can get a v&o.
I thought that ARROGANT might have something to do with 'leaving in a huff' or whatever the clue was. Sometimes the clues are quite tenuous.
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli
- Martin Gardner
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1492
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:57 pm
- Location: Leeds, UK
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I was seriously impressed (obviously) a shame about INCUBATES which would have given you 136, one of the highest ever scores. I'm starting to wonder what the longest ever string of scoring in every round is? You've scored points in 30 rounds of out 30 so far, I think. Seriously well done.
If you cut a gandiseeg in half, do you get two gandiseegs or two halves of a gandiseeg?
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Nah - that's what the cryptic clue is forJulie T wrote:P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Very impressive, I thought you were going to rack up a Fellesque megascore when INCUBATES came out but it was still a pretty monstrous total in the end.
Martin, I think Tom Hargreaves had a ludicrous run of scoring in consecutive rounds, I can't remember the exact details though. Hopefully Charlie can go on and smash it.
Martin, I think Tom Hargreaves had a ludicrous run of scoring in consecutive rounds, I can't remember the exact details though. Hopefully Charlie can go on and smash it.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 391
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:32 pm
- Location: Petersfield (Hants)
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Well done today Charlie - You were truely awsome matey. Well done!
Allan
Allan
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I came up with ARROGANT Julie.Michael Wallace wrote:Nah - that's what the cryptic clue is forJulie T wrote:P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
What I normally do, is mute the TV when Des gives out the TTT and clue, so I can see if I can solve the anagram by myself without any clues.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Ah - my approach is to try and solve it between Des reading (and often spelling) out what it is and him saying the cryptic clue, although they seem to be getting harder.
-
- Series 80 Champion
- Posts: 2707
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
In the APOGEE round I was urging the last letter to be an N for the impressive JALAPENO (which it would have been had you gone for a consonant) but you picked 5 sodding vowels!
- Debbi Flack
- Acolyte
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I spotted incubates and got the 282 numbers game. I narrowly pipped Charlie to the conundrum but overall - well, let's just say I lost!!
She came, she saw - oh well, at least she tried!
- Joseph Bolas
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
What you could also do is turn over for a few minutes, then turn back whilst the ads are on and then try to solve it at the beginning of the next halve, before it reveals itself.Michael Wallace wrote:Ah - my approach is to try and solve it between Des reading (and often spelling) out what it is and him saying the cryptic clue, although they seem to be getting harder.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Had I been playing the challenger and not bottled, I'd have won 137-16 (a winning margin of 121) which would have been a record for me and the TV but hey. You beat me with DETONATE Charlie as I decided not to risk BATTENED. Well played. Please stop the Jonoesque 5 vowels though!Michael Wallace wrote:Great stuff, I got SPREADERS but missed INCUBATES - disappointed Charlie missed the 2nd numbers though. What's the biggest winning margin anyway? That game when DOD left someone with about 15?
- Charlie Reams
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9494
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
- Location: Cambridge
- Contact:
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
5 vowels is good. The objective is to beat your opponent, not to get the longest word possible.
- Kirk Bevins
- God
- Posts: 4923
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
- Location: York, UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Good shout.Charlie Reams wrote:5 vowels is good. The objective is to beat your opponent, not to get the longest word possible.
-
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 391
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:32 pm
- Location: Petersfield (Hants)
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I agree if the game is close and you have the edge on word power - In this instance the game was already in the bag long ago and record scores were looming - was it the wisest choice to almost eliminate the chance of a 9 letter word?Kirk Bevins wrote:Good shout.Charlie Reams wrote:5 vowels is good. The objective is to beat your opponent, not to get the longest word possible.
Can't fault Charlie's performance though, as he got the best possible with what he selected.
Allan
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Having read Jon Corby's recap, I hadn't heard Des mumbling 'herb' - thought he said 'earl' or somesuch. Makes sense now, Michael.Joseph Bolas wrote:I came up with ARROGANT Julie.Michael Wallace wrote:Nah - that's what the cryptic clue is forJulie T wrote:P.S. BTW, did anyone else get ARROGANT for the second TTT? Crappy when there's more than one possible anagram.
What I normally do, is mute the TV when Des gives out the TTT and clue, so I can see if I can solve the anagram by myself without any clues.
I usually enjoy thinking through the clue, Joseph - added extra brain workout!
Think I'll go back to watching it recorded, so I can rewind what my little-old-lady ears haven't heard. (Don't tell her, or she may want them back! )
I'll just have to contain my fluttering anticipation to see 'DREAMIEST REAMIEST' in action again.
(Becks - Jon? I think not! )
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli
-
- Series 48 Champion
- Posts: 481
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:08 pm
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Poor old challenger... not much went right for him, four words disallowed, SPOILED when DESPOILS was there, and then Susie making him spell BATTENED and drawing the mistake when he was already 67 points behind just put the tin lid on it! Can't help feeling a bit sorry for him, although not faulting Charlie at all, I know what it's like to be in that position.
George Greenhough, the no.3 seed in my series, actually used, once he was miles ahead, to deliberately lose rounds / leave the conundrum even though he knew the answer, to let his opponents catch up a bit. Can't say I recommend that
Well done Charlie, you beat me in r4 when I went for CARNIER^ (used to be in ). Am pleased that no-one else - not even Beevers? - seems to have spotted FAMULUS though
George Greenhough, the no.3 seed in my series, actually used, once he was miles ahead, to deliberately lose rounds / leave the conundrum even though he knew the answer, to let his opponents catch up a bit. Can't say I recommend that
Well done Charlie, you beat me in r4 when I went for CARNIER^ (used to be in ). Am pleased that no-one else - not even Beevers? - seems to have spotted FAMULUS though
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
Charlie, you've just given me what is probably my most depressing breakfast ever - almost certainly my heaviest defeat when playing along at home. My only respite was to beat you with the 282 numbers round.
As for other comments I've read here: I, too went for BARSTOOL in TTT1. The clue was pretty close.
Charlie's comment about going for five vowels because the prime objective is to do better than your opponent, rather than for both to get a high scoring word, is very valid, but I'd never considered that with letters selections before. I've always regarded that as the right approach on numbers rounds, and get annoyed when Carol says things like she said in today's programme "we had three nice numbers rounds yesterday". No we didn't have three nice numbers rounds yesterday; we had three easy numbers rounds. A nice numbers round is one in which you can get closer to the target than your opponent can. Round 10 today was a nice numbers round.
You were bloody brilliant today, Charlie. I look forward to many more. Let's hope the football team which you support can emulate your performance this afternoon. If they don't, I think I shall feign sickness tomorrow, rather than face my Stoke supporting pupils.
As for other comments I've read here: I, too went for BARSTOOL in TTT1. The clue was pretty close.
Charlie's comment about going for five vowels because the prime objective is to do better than your opponent, rather than for both to get a high scoring word, is very valid, but I'd never considered that with letters selections before. I've always regarded that as the right approach on numbers rounds, and get annoyed when Carol says things like she said in today's programme "we had three nice numbers rounds yesterday". No we didn't have three nice numbers rounds yesterday; we had three easy numbers rounds. A nice numbers round is one in which you can get closer to the target than your opponent can. Round 10 today was a nice numbers round.
You were bloody brilliant today, Charlie. I look forward to many more. Let's hope the football team which you support can emulate your performance this afternoon. If they don't, I think I shall feign sickness tomorrow, rather than face my Stoke supporting pupils.
- Michael Wallace
- Racoonteur
- Posts: 5458
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:01 am
- Location: London
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
[quote="Howard Somerset"]Charlie's comment about going for five vowels because the prime objective is to do better than your opponent, rather than for both to get a high scoring word, is very valid, but I'd never considered that with letters selections before. I've always regarded that as the right approach on numbers rounds, and get annoyed when Carol says things like she said in today's programme "we had three nice numbers rounds yesterday". No we didn't have three nice numbers rounds yesterday; we had three easy numbers rounds. A nice numbers round is one in which you can get closer to the target than your opponent can. Round 10 today was a nice numbers round./quote]
If you look at it from Carol's perspective though, the most 'work' she has to do is if there's a tough numbers game which neither of the contestants get. I've often thought that she must be genuinely relieved when it's an easy round because it means she doesn't have to worry!
If you look at it from Carol's perspective though, the most 'work' she has to do is if there's a tough numbers game which neither of the contestants get. I've often thought that she must be genuinely relieved when it's an easy round because it means she doesn't have to worry!
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1955
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
- Location: UK
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
I quite agree, Michael. Carol is using the word nice from her own perspective, or from the perspective of a contestant who is weak at numbers, rather than viewed by someone whose strength is numbers. To give a letters round analogy, someone, such as me, who is weak at letters rounds, would regard a letters selection in which a 9 letter solution can easily be obtained by simply reversing the last two letters as a nice selection, because I would know I couldn't be beaten. A person who's good a letters, on the other hand, would prefer a selection in which the maximum is much more obscure.Michael Wallace wrote:If you look at it from Carol's perspective though, the most 'work' she has to do is if there's a tough numbers game which neither of the contestants get. I've often thought that she must be genuinely relieved when it's an easy round because it means she doesn't have to worry!Howard Somerset wrote:Charlie's comment about going for five vowels because the prime objective is to do better than your opponent, rather than for both to get a high scoring word, is very valid, but I'd never considered that with letters selections before. I've always regarded that as the right approach on numbers rounds, and get annoyed when Carol says things like she said in today's programme "we had three nice numbers rounds yesterday". No we didn't have three nice numbers rounds yesterday; we had three easy numbers rounds. A nice numbers round is one in which you can get closer to the target than your opponent can. Round 10 today was a nice numbers round.
Re: Spoilers for Thursday 16th of October
True. It's easy to forget, when cheering on Charlie, that there are other players involved, who've been able enough to get through the process to get onto the show, but are then pitted against a maestro.Julian Fell wrote:Poor old challenger... not much went right for him,....
Also seems a bit patronising to the challenger really, even if you've got past the point where you're not risking losing. Also, with all the effort that Charlie puts into being great at Countdown, if I were him I'd want to aim for max scores.Julian Fell wrote: George Greenhough, the no.3 seed in my series, actually used, once he was miles ahead, to deliberately lose rounds / leave the conundrum even though he knew the answer, to let his opponents catch up a bit. Can't say I recommend that
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me." Benjamin Disraeli